The Applicant's Proposal ("109OZ") Height.

The proposal is for a "6-storey" building, but with its extra-high first floor and HVAC storey it is 82 ft high, as high as an 8-storey building. Ossington is Lowrise (1 to 4 storeys), the proposal is Midrise (5 to 10 storeys). The 82 ft height almost doubles Ossington's bylaw maximum of 46 ft. Bulk, looming, shadow. The proposal is 151 ft wide (9 storefronts wide) and 116 ft deep, just 21 ft from Argyle Place and Givins residences. Multiplied by its 82 ft height, this makes for a huge, bulky structure, which would loom over the centre of the Ossington strip and several dozen homes, blocking afternoon light from dozens of front and back flower and vegetable gardens. Balconies and overlook. The proposal has 80+ balconies up to 70 ft closely and directly overlooking front and back yards of several dozen homes on Argyle, Givins, and even Brookfield. The noise and privacy concerns for residents are obvious. Units. The proposal has 86 small units (median unit size 720 sq ft), no family (3BR) units. Chain store retail. The 12K sq ft retail space is built to house one "AAA" retail (i.e., chain) store. Negative impact on Ossington's character. Ossington's status as Toronto's restaurant row and eclectic destination district depends on its Lowrise, open sky, low-key, intimate "town square" feel. Building a large Midrise condo with chain retail on Ossington—with more Midrise to quickly follow— would significantly undermine Ossington's distinctive character. Density. The proposal has a density—the ratio of square footage built to the size of the lot—of 3.9:1. That is 56% higher than the existing bylaw maximum of 2.5:1. Traffic, parking, safety. The proposal has parking for 70 cars off of Argyle Place laneway (which would need to be widened—how?). This doubles the cars in the area and raises serious safety concerns about vehicles cutting across Argyle St, the main walking path of children going to GivinsShaw Elementary, and a primary pedestrian and bike path route to Trinity-Bellwoods park. The Legal Question. Reserve Properties is asking to build Midrise (5 to 10 storeys) on Lowrise (1 to 4 storeys) Ossington. But, on our understanding, this is contrary to Toronto's Official Plan. The basic aim of the Official Plan is "Grow, but Protect": make room for 3 million efficiently housed residents by 2030 without wrecking existing neighbourhoods. The design for this is to draw a line around 25% of the city's lands for "intensification", development beyond customary norms. The other 75% is protected from intensification. The Ossington Strip is in the 75% of protected lands. More specifically: in the OP section on Structuring Growth in the City, Policy (2i): "Growth will be directed to the Centres, Avenues, Employment Districts, and the Downtown as shown on Map 2 in order to … protect neighbourhoods … from the effects of nearby development". Map 2 is reproduced on the back of this sheet: it is obvious at a glance that Ossington is not an Avenue. And so Ossington is protected. Reserve is arguing that the Ossington strip is "like" an Avenue (a broad long corridor such as King, Queen, Dundas, Bloor, and Eglinton) but it isn't: it is too narrow (17.5m wide; minimum Avenue width is 20m), too short (only 590m, from Queen to Dundas), and it is not a corridor—it carries little traffic. The Applicant is trying to blur the sharp lines drawn in the Plan intended to protect areas like Ossington. Such blurring would defeat the purpose of the Plan. Moreover, there is plenty of room to grow on Ossington within current bylaw limits: we could double or triple the existing density within these limits. We have not outgrown the bylaws.

Figure 1 top: Applicant's artist's conception of "109OZ" in existing streetscape bottom: OCA artist's conception of "109OZ" in existing streetscape Both draw the height of the building to the left the same

Figure 2: "Official Plan Map 2: Urban Structure", the map specifying those areas to which, by Structuring Growth Policy 2, growth "will be directed": Ossington is not one of those areas